Chess ColumnOf course, if you know anything at all about the Jerome Gambit, you probably have heard all sorts of comments and evaluations. Contrast Raymond Keene’s assessment in The Complete Book of Gambits (1992) -“This is totally unsound and should never be tried!” - with that of the creator of the opening, Alonzo Wheeler Jerome, who considered it
To Correspondents:
F. G. C. (Nanoose) ...We do not recognize the opening outlined by you, although a similar early sacrifice occurs in the Jerome Gambit, as follows: 1. P-K4 P-K4 2. Kt-KB Kt-QB3 3. B-B4 B-B4 4. BxP ch KxB 5.K[sic]xP ch Kt x Kt 6.Q-R5 ch, etc. It is of course eminently unsound, a criticism which we should also be inclined to address to your suggestion.
...only a pleasant variation of the Giuoco Piano, which may win or lose according to the skill of the players, but which is capable of affording many new positions and opportunities for heavy blows unexpectedly.A few years later, Jerome was quoted in the Pittsburgh Telegraph, which noted
Mr. A. W. Jerome calls attention to the fact that he does not claim the Jerome Gambit to be analytically sound, but only that over the board it is sound enough to afford a vast amount of amusement.Still, the opinions started early, and flowed easily. William Hallock, of the American Chess Journal, in 1877, referred to “Jerome’s Absurdity” - but, later, he referenced the Gambit as "the daring and brilliant debut".
Lieutenant Soren Anton Sorensen, whose article in the May 1877 issue of the Danish chess magazine Nordisk Skaktidende was the first serious, in-depth look at the Jerome Gambit - one which was translated into several different languages and informed chess players around the world - was still light-hearted in his assessment
...with a Bashi-Bazouk attack, over which the learned Italians would have crossed themselves had they known it came under the idea of piano, but which is in reality of very recent date - 1874, and takes it origin from an American, A.W. Jerome. It consists in the sacrifice of a piece by 4.Bxf7+. Naturally we immediately remark that it is unsound, and that Black must obtain the advantage; but the attack is pretty sharp, and Black must take exact care, if he does not wish to go quickly to the dogs.In 1879, the chess columnist for the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, in its chess column, struck the right tone in its review of G. H. D. Gossip’s Theory of the Chess Openings, noting gleefully
...the Jerome Gambit, which high-toned players sometimes affect to despise because it is radically unsound, finds a place, and to this it is certainly entitled.The February 2, 1881 Pittsburgh Telegraph column noted that the gambit
…although unsound, as shown by Mr. Charles' analysis in this column, yet [it] leads to some interesting and critical positions.Likewise the chess column in the New Orleans Times-Democrat, for October 19, 1884, referred to the Jerome as "brilliant but unsound".
Skepticism rightly persisted. E. Freeborough and C. E. Rankin's Chess Openings Ancient and Modern (1889), proceeded
The Jerome Gambit is an American invention, and a very risky attack. It is described in the American Supplement to Cook's Synopsis as unsound but not to be trifled with. The first player sacrifices two pieces for two Pawns, and the chances arising from the adversary's King being displaced and drawn into the centre of the board. "The defense requires study, and is sometimes difficult." It may be added that it is equally difficult for the first player to maintain the attack.I could go on, but I will leave the final word to a World Champion, who, in the March 1906 issue of his Lasker’s Chess Magazine, responded to an inquiry
No; the Jerome gambit is not named after St. Jerome. His penances, if he did any, were in atonement of rather minor transgressions compared with the gambit.
